إرفنج ضد ليبستدات

Transcripts

Well, my Lord, let him fight his own battles. The 1excuse for not knowing, which is as far as I would go. Of 2course, it is not a smoking gun. It is not the kind of 3balance of probabilities, or even evidence beyond all 4reasonable doubt that would be required in a criminal 5case. But he had no excuse for not having known because 6he then came into very close proximity with a large number 7of people who had been briefed in the most nauseating 8detail by Himmler himself as to what he was doing. I have 9made no secret about that in my books. I would be 10interested to hear how learned counsel gets round that 11particular problem when the time comes. 12MR JUSTICE GRAY: That again is extremely helpful to have you 13say that, but can I ask you one question arising out of 14it? I quite follow why you take October 1943 as the date 15from which you accept Hitler was in the know. 16A.
[Mr Irving]
Had no excuse not to know. 17Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Or had no excuse not to know, but what about the period 18with I think Mr Rampton has really been dealing with this 19afternoon between November/December 1941 and October 1943? 20A.
[Mr Irving]
We are very ill-advised by the documents that are 21available even now. We are ill informed by the documents 22that are available even now after 55 years, my Lord, and 23this is where you begin having to say that, I forget what 24the legal term is, there may be a legal term for it, but 25in any case of ambiguity then the balance of doubt has to 26be given to the accused rather than to the incriminated.

. P-181

1Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Can that really be right when you have a situation where 2Hitler was at any rate not objecting as from October 1943 3to what most people would regard as thoroughly abhorrent? 4A.
[Mr Irving]
Yes. 5Q.
[Mr Justice Gray]
Can you not infer from that that, assuming the evidence 6was available for him, he would not have put up any 7objection before October 1943? 8A.
[Mr Irving]
That is precisely the way that I would be inclined to put 9it, my Lord. I have even said on occasion that there is 10no evidence that he would have objected even if he had 11been told the most brutal detail of what was going on. 12But we just do not have that evidence. My literary agent 13in America said, "For God's sake, if you have not got the 14evidence, invent it". I thought my ten years spent in 15researching the book were too precious for that. 16MR RAMPTON: So it really comes to this, does it, Mr Irving? 17If you were sitting on a jury in a criminal court, whereas 18I might very easily convict Hitler, you would not, but, if 19you are looking for proof positive that he did not know, 20you are swimming very hard against the tide, are you not? 21A.
[Mr Irving]
No. You talk about in a criminal court and in a criminal 22court of course the standards of evidence required, 23particularly where a man's life is at stake, are much 24sterner than in a civil action. Am I right? 25Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Never mind civil actions or criminal actions. This is a 26rotten analogy, anyway. You are an historian.

. P-182

1A.
[Mr Irving]
Mr Rampton, you started the analogy. 2Q.
[Mr Rampton]
No, you did, with your references to the standard of proof 3in a criminal court when you were answering his Lordship. 4It is a rotten analogy. 5A.
[Mr Irving]
I think it is a very useful analogy. 6Q.
[Mr Rampton]
What are you looking at as an historian is not a question 7whether a man is guilty or not of law, whether he is 8liable to pay damages. You are looking at the evidence 9with an open and objective mind to see what is the degree 10of probability that it suggests as to what happened. That 11is what are you doing, is it not? 12A.
[Mr Irving]
This is right, but then at this point different historians 13operate in different ways, and it may be that I make 14myself culpable by just putting the evidence in the pages 15and not joining up the dots and allowing the reader to do 16the dot joining for himself. I assume that my readers 17have a certain degree of intellectual honesty and ability, 18that they are capable of forming their own conclusions 19provided I present the evidence to them with as much 20integrity as possible. Other historians, like no doubt 21some of the experts in this case, like to join up the dots 22for you and that is where the mistakes I think creep in. 23It is possible that my way of writing history is wrong. 24It is possible their way of writing history is right. 25They have been taught in universities how to write, I have 26not, but this is not Holocaust denial, Mr Rampton.

. P-183

1Q.
[Mr Rampton]
Well, Mr Irving, we will come to that next week, but your 2method of writing history, whether one approves of it 3academically or not is quite beside the point, is 4perfectly all right provided that you do not distort and 5manipulate the evidence, is it not? 6A.
[Mr Irving]
You are absolutely right. 7Q.
[Mr Rampton]
If we should succeed in proving that that is exactly what 8you have done on a number of occasions, then you do not 9deserve the name historian, do you? 10A.
[Mr Irving]
I take you do not consider that you have succeeded so far. 11Q.
[Mr Rampton]
What privately I should think, Mr Irving, I certainly am 12not going to tell you. 13A.
[Mr Irving]
From the way you couched the question. 14Q.
[Mr Rampton]
I could be standing here thinking why am I going through 15all this, I have already cooked ---- 16A.
[Mr Irving]
You know why you are going through this, and I do. It is 17connected with a very substantial fee you are paid for 18this. 19MR JUSTICE GRAY: That is cheap. Let us get on. 20MR RAMPTON: It is not only cheap, it is complete rubbish. My 21Lord, I would pass now, if I may ---- 22MR JUSTICE GRAY: I think we will probably stop now. 23MR RAMPTON: I tell you where I am going next. I am going 24briefly to Dr Brach in the autumn of 1941, which relates 25to gassings in the Warthegau and possibly also in Riga. 26JUSTICE GRAY: Is that vans?

. P-184

1MR RAMPTON: Vans yes, and then I am going to go to what 2Mr Irving calls the Schlegelberger memorandum, and then 3probably to the Roman Jews, unless your Lordship would 4prefer, which equally well we can do, to have a look at 5Hitler's earlier utterances. 6MR JUSTICE GRAY: No. All I think is that sometime that is 7relevant. 8MR RAMPTON: It is obviously important. 9MR JUSTICE GRAY: Both to the manipulation and also to 10Auschwitz. 11MR RAMPTON: Yes. I am thinking that the subject of Hitler's 12Adjutants is a long one with, I am afraid, probably quite 13a lot of documents to look at because of the records of 14what they said. That may take more than one day, which 15I do not have, so I was going to leave that until after 16Auschwitz. 17MR JUSTICE GRAY: Yes, that is fine. It does occur to me that 18sometimes there is scope for exploring before one gets 19into the detail. 20MR RAMPTON: I know. 21MR JUSTICE GRAY: We had an example just a moment ago. It is 22not remotely intended to be a reproof. 23MR RAMPTON: It is amazing what answers one can get. I have 24made the assumption, perhaps wrongly, that any general 25question I ask is either going to get no answer ---- 26MR JUSTICE GRAY: